To post hypertext links to articles/items, use the following method:

1. Copy and paste (or type) the following string:

Headline[">http://link">Headline[ /url]

2. Remove the two blank spaces.

3. Trade "http://link" with the actual url address of the page you wish to appear when the link is clicked.

4. Trade "Headline" with the news article's headline or your own descriptive text.

EXAMPLE:

[url= http://dmusic.com]Dmusic[ /url]

...remove the 2 spaces and it becomes:

[url=http://dmusic.com]Dmusic

===============

Folks, sometimes it is a lot quicker/better to alert our readers to important/relevant news articles and other items by sticking a quick link to them right here in this "news" thread than it is to submit using the "news/submit" button at the top of the page.

If you point your cursor at the "news" button, then do a "mouse-over" (awaiting the drop-down menu to provide you the "submit" option and all... THEN bother to type in or C&P your submission correctly in the proper format...
...Sheesh, after all that, your submission STILL has to await the "approval process" (meaning that I, or one of the fine Dmusic admin have to be online and alert enough to check the article input box, THEN decide where it needs filed, proof-read, etc... )

If you have an article/story/item that needs our attention, why not simply stick it here "In The News" instead! (Besides, I'll go to the front page with anything found here that meets the same criteria used for that "article input box" anyways.)

Let's save some time and hassle. Use that "submit" button only for ORIGINAL articles that come from your own hand.

" articles that come from your own hand."

could be a sticky wicket there Shmoo.

lol.

Apple's IPod Success Isn't Sweet Music for Record Company Sales --Bloomberg

Hollywood Frequently Misleads Press on Piracy Facts --mp3newswire

Can Open Source Outdo the IPod? --Wired

FROM THE INBOX:

To Whom It May Concern--

I'm a sophomore journalism major at Michigan State University, and as part of my class we need to write news stories.
I was wondering if you could maybe help me out! I'm doing a story on digital music and the "free" music that students get.
If you have a moment, could you answer some of these questions?

What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of free music sources? (LimeWire, etc.)
Do you think the "free" music revolution will ever come to an end?
Do you think people who download music illegally feel guilty about it?

Thank you so much!

Sincerely,
Kristen Creager
creagerk(AT)msu.edu

"What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of free music sources? (LimeWire, etc.)"

Currently (and unfortunately) p2p is nearly useless for the independent musician/creator. (There's simply too much RIAA crap in the way.) Using an indie site like Dmusic, or having things like OurMedia and the Internet Archive are better ways to distribute content.

"Do you think the "free" music revolution will ever come to an end?"

Not exactly sure what you mean. Will the fight over copyright end? Not until our enemy is utterly destroyed and greed itself is eliminated.

"Do you think people who download music illegally feel guilty about it?"

If they believe it is illegal and still do it anyway???

The official position of Boycott-Riaa is that folks should only download and/or share content that wants fair-use. All the RIAA stuff and everything infected with DRM should be simply ignored.

"What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of free music sources? (LimeWire, etc.)"

ADVANTAGES
Obvious answer: It's FREE.
Other points: You don't get music files with DRM. You may find music not carried at pay sites, or music no longer available anywhere because the record label no longer makes the recording available. More music becomes easily available.
DISADVANTAGES
You can be sued if you pick the wrong music to download or share. Even if you are a 12-year-old, a dead grandma, or a disabled mom.

"Do you think the "free" music revolution will ever come to an end?"

That depends. If we continue to allow our government to take RIAA money to pass legislation the makes them illegal, it could come to an end. But the 'cat is out of the bag'! (Don't groan, it is national cliche day). No amount of legalease can change that.

"Do you think people who download music illegally feel guilty about it?"

Since recent reports indicate that downloading has increased over the years, I would have to say no. Neither should they. First off, not ALL music being traded or downloaded on "free" sites is necessarily illegal to be there. I certainly won't feel guilty about downloading a music file of a song I can no longer get on CD, or one that I have already purchased on vinyl years ago.

Radio City Nixes Musicians Offer to Return --AP

Guitar icon Les Paul looks back on 90 years --AP

Yale School of Music to Go Tuition-Free --AP

I want to know who donated the money.

...and why.

(I hope it wasn't the RIAA.)

Google Offers Index of Public Domain Works --AP

Samsung Not Entering Online Music Business --AP

Music videos resurrected by online, phone delivery --Reuters

America Online buys digital music firm --Reuters

Major labels hijack Indie moniker.

"Indie rock" is evidently now a genre for the majors instead of an identifier of legal music.

Boucher has some very interesting statements in the Flag hearings! He mispronounced Bainwol's name twice. yay. Boucher mentions of course that only yesterday was anyone given a chance to see the legislation. Boucher has a real command of the issues.

Berman and Issa made complete fools of themselves.

I'm recording it. Both Boucher and Glickman go on and on about the desired result that people in rural towns (esp. Bouce\her's 81-yr. old mother) can see TV materials online.And yet I am a criminal for capturing public domain governement materials.

There is nothing independent about that band. I am pissed at the hi-jack of the term too. Didn't the RIAA industry already destroy "alternative" over a decade ago?

I know he's mostly refering to a business's internal security, but I'm not sure I like his attitude:

Spies in the server closet --Computer World

Eric Cole, chief scientist for Lockheed Martin Information Technology...

"The Internet is so vast, porous and complex, it's easy to set up underground networks that are almost impossible to find and take down," Cole says.


He advises that the best -- and perhaps only -- defense against darknets is a combination of network security best practices (such as firewalls, intrusion-detection systems and intrusion-prevention systems) and keeping intellectual property under lock and key.


In addition, he says, companies should enact a security policy called "least privilege," which means users are given the least amount of access they need to do their jobs. "Usually if a darknet is set up it's because an individual has too much access," Cole says.

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlLA/on/dupi ng_the_press_music_industry_edition_27806.asp

Duping the press, music industry edition



Earlier this week, we asked the mediabistro.com readership to tantalize us with tales of systematic attempts by entertainment companies to mislead the journalists who cover them. Here's something from the music business. A reader writes:

If you go the the RIAA website, which is the tradegroup for music, you'll see that they list all their number in terms of "units shipped". This is basically a BS number, because stores can return anything they don't sell. As a result, except for SoundScan (which charges for information) it is almost impossible to figure out how many copies of an album are sold, which record companies love because they can tell people that they've shipped a gazillion albums, when they actually only sold 15.

What is worse is that it is almost impossible to accurately figure out what an artist got in a deal...

Look at reporting around the Robbie Williams deal out of EMI in 2003. Estimates of what he received ranged from $15m to $100m. The company still has not disclosed what was actually spent. One has to wonder how it lines up with Regulation FD to have company officials giving out "shipped" numbers and then bogus guidence on artist costs (which is the major music cost center beyond exec's salaries). If the SEC ever actually investigated an entertainment company, there would be widespread changes in how they deal with the press. But they won't. So companies will continue misleading (and what's more, various executives will tell opposing lies in order to further personal agendas. Its not bad that they all lie. It's bad that their lies disagree).

Well, this was bound to happen. It was just a matter of time before this would happen: Federline rap posted on Internet

Here's a little snippet of his skill [Do not read this on a full stomach]

"Back then, they called me K-Fed, but you can call me Daddy instead," he intones in the chorus of Y'all Ain't Ready.

"Back then, they called me K-Fed, but you can call me Cletus instead," he intones in the chorus of Y'all Ain't Ready.

That's better

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/04/secfocus_wow_bot/

World of Warcraft hackers using Sony BMG rootkit

Want to cheat in your online game and not get caught? Just buy a Sony BMG copy protected CD.

World of Warcraft hackers have confirmed that the hiding capabilities of Sony BMG's content protection software can make tools made for cheating in the online world impossible to detect. The software - deemed a "rootkit" by many security experts - is shipped with tens of thousands of the record company's music titles.

Blizzard Entertainment, the maker of World of Warcraft, has created a controversial program that detects cheaters by scanning the processes that are running at the time the game is played. Called the Warden, the anti-cheating program cannot detect any files that are hidden with Sony BMG's content protection, which only requires that the hacker add the prefix "$sys$" to file names.

Despite making a patch available on Wednesday to consumers to amend its copy protection software's behavior, Sony BMG and First 4 Internet, the maker of the content protection technology, have both disputed claims that their system could harm the security of a Windows system. Yet, other software makers that rely on the integrity of the operating system are finding that hidden code makes security impossible.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/04/levy_mp3/

Dutch drop €3.28 per gig levy on MP3 players

A controversial proposed tax in the Netherlands on MP3 players of as much as € 3.28 ($4.30) per gigabyte has been revised, though still not enough to please the electronics industry.

A new proposal by the Foundation Onderhandeling Thuiskopievergoeding (SONT), which negotiates between hardware manufacturers and the collecting agency Stichting Thuiskopie, suggests a surcharge of €0.20 per 32MB with a maximum of €1 and €8 to €25 for audio players with a hard disk of 10GB or more. There also will be a tax on DVRs of €0.15 per gigabyte. SONT believes the levy will be more tolerable than the previous proposed tax, which was to put €180 ($235) to the price of a top end iPod.

However, ICT Office, the 450 members strong Dutch trade association for IT, Telecom and Office industries, has already condemned the new proposal. Spokesman Bernd Taselaar said Friday that the proposed levy ignores European policies and will hurt business. Other critics say that levies on MP3 players are outmoded, as more and more users buy content online, which means that copyright is being purchased twice over if a levy is also paid. The proposal also seem to ignore the fact that hard disc capacity is growing every few months. Introducing a levy would make hardware unjustly expensive.

Stichting Thuiskopie will discuss the proposal on Monday, but it may have to conclude that is little support for a levy, despite the fact that it can introduce the tax without any further discussion.

This item, with regards to previous threads [ sometimes pretty contentious] , that we had here regarding the way PBS was going...

Former CPB Chairman Ken Tomlinson Resigns

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/04/faultline_movie_downloads/

Movie download services quietly working on licensing

A report landed on our desk last week from a respected European research company, that said that European movie downloads would reach £60m ($106m) by 2010. There is so much wrong with this prediction it’s difficult to know where to start. This was supposed to be encouraging for the film industry and make them invest in online downloading, suggesting that the market for video downloads will follow in the footsteps of music.

I suppose that’s what’s most wrong with it, the fact that there has been no single innovator yet to emerge, as in iTunes for music, so it makes it tough to gauge just how successful downloading is going to be. But there are some indicators, such as the fact that as many as 150,000 movie titles were traded each day over P2P networks up until those networks started to withdraw from the piracy market. Also pure DVD sales, which absorbed over $21bn in revenues last year in the US. The top 25 US released films grossed $11bn so far this year at the box office, say £14bn for an entire year. For downloads to be significant they need to be able to reach 10 per cent of all film revenues. Total film revenues per annum must be around $35bn a year if our sums above are right, so movie downloads are really only viable if they promise one day to hit 10 per cent of total film revenues, let’s say $3.5bn. In order to reach that exalted number during the next five years they would have to be in sight of $350m in the first year they take off.

Given that Europe may digest around one third of the global film download revenue, that might lead you to think that $106m is reasonable, but it’s not. That would be for a first year when video downloads get off the ground, which will be next year, not for 2010, by which time we would need to be approaching 10 per cent, otherwise the studios would just give up and forget about it.

By 2010 not most, but a considerable proportion of internet lines, will have been upgraded to ADSL2+ or better, yielding last mile speeds of 20 Mbps and above. While it won’t be possible to download a film in real time because of the Quality of Service guarantees that you’ll need right the way across a network, buffered set tops or PCs will be able to deliver a film using best effort internet and begin playing it five or ten minutes after the download started.

Downloaded video gets more attractive every year. Also as piracy over P2P networks gradually evaporates, due to the recent successful legal rulings in the US, P2P will begin to be used as a rapid delivery technology, and we already know that this can offer much improved delivery performance.

So it is reasonable to assume that this 10 per cent threshold will be reached and film download will be established by 2010, and that revenues will be around $3.5bn globally with around $1.2bn of that coming from Europe

Already in the UK alone there are a number of initiatives with the BBC, British Telecom and BSkyB each separately expecting to have millions of customers downloading programming. The BBC is planning to charge for non-UK video downloads and has 24 million overseas visitors each month to its web site.

It is also reasonable to take viewing habits from people who rent DVDs whether via retail or via online DVD services. In which case we can pretty quickly establish the type or number of people who watch films and what they are prepared to pay. Given the much wider variety of films that can be kept in stock with an online service (virtually unlimited) it suggests that much of these two rental markets and some of the DVD purchase market will drift to movie downloads. The one thing that is missing to trigger all of this activity, so far, has been the lack of a single market leader for video downloads that has “got the proposition right” as iTunes did for music.

In two years since the launch of iTunes, some 500 million songs have been bought using iTunes, and at a dollar each that is more money than Screen Digest is predicting for movies. That’s can’t be right. Not when for each song the record labels want something like $.65 for each track sold, while the movie industry would want more like $8 for each film sold, perhaps $1.99 for each film rented, in line with Apple’s video pricing.

That $8 isn’t pulled out of a hat by the way. It is understood that this is what Sony will be asking when it finally releases its top 500 films, next year, triggering the take off in legally downloading films. There was one hope that Apple would unblock the log-jam earlier, when it launched its video iPod, but it looks like the Movie Studios have learned from the disillusion of the Record Labels and are refusing to let iTunes call the shots on pricing, delivery timescales and tying the films to a single, first to market device like the iPod. Instead it looks like Apple will get these films at the same time as everyone else, and probably around the end of March Sony will deliver on its promises to release these films in digital online format and the rest of the studios will follow.

While film licensing is far more complex than music licensing, and it took iTunes almost a year to cross the Atlantic due to licensing negotiations, it is likely that US only or Japan only or both countries will see film services launched by the Spring and the others would gradually follow.

We know that such negotiations have been going on at Bertelsmann subsidiary Arvato and also that Tiscali has been attempting to build European licenses for CinemaNow content, for over a year, so Europe may not be quite so far behind the US this time.

The result will be multiple commercial outlets in almost every country by the middle of next year, and while Apple will not be left out it will have its work cut out trying to climb to the top of the pile in films, without the head start it had in music.

Screen Digest says that every broadband household in the UK will have downloaded at least one movie from a legitimate Internet movie service by 2010 citing 18.5m broadband homes in the UK by 2010, consuming over 20m movies a year via Internet platforms.

We say that the market will be that big next year, rising in a parallel development that music experienced with iTunes, thereafter, until it becomes 10 per cent of the global movie market. Let’s see who’s right.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/04/microsoft_library/

Microsoft to digitise 100,000 books

Microsoft and the British Library have come together to make 100,000 of the institution's titles available online. The deal covers some 25 million pages which will be made available as part of Microsoft's book search service, next year.

This is the software giant's second foray into digital archiving: it is already working with the Open Content Alliance to make 150,000 titles available online, and the BBC reports that the company is already planning to extend its work with the British Library.

"This is great news for research and scholarship and will give unparalleled access to our vast collections to people all over the world: they will be available to anyone, anywhere and at anytime," British Library chief executive Lynne Brindley told the BBC.

Unlike Google's digital library project, all the titles Microsoft plans to scan are out of copyright, and so can be digitised with none of the legal wrangling that the search giant is enduring.

The Association of American Publishers (AAP) is suing Google over its plans to make scans of millions of books available online. The company is also facing legal action from the Authors Guild and a former US poet Laureate.

Google says it will focus its initial efforts on works that are no longer in copyright, but will not rule out digitising in-print titles at a later stage.

Hey Shmoo, can we ask the powers that be to dump the Sony ads? Really bad taste considering...

"Hey Shmoo, can we ask the powers that be to dump the Sony ads? Really bad taste considering... "

Why, seriously ?
It's more money out of Sony's pocket.
I think the irony of sony paying to be
seen here is absolutely delicious .

Pirates attack cruise ship, using automatic CD burners and rocket propelled inserts.

Besides, TotallyFrustrated, somebody's gotta pay for this little playground. I'm with Dredd..I think it's perfectly evil.

"Rocket propelled inserts"? I'm outta here.....

From Ray Beckerman's site:

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

Too bad this site could not have sent someone to represent BOYCOTT-RIAA

Wasn't it Thursday that Tom went to the hearing? Couldn't he have done both? Why the heck not? Just kidding....but I still want to see/hear the tape he was making..

Unsecured Wi-Fi would be outlawed by N.Y. county
http://news.com.com/Unsecured+Wi-Fi+would+be+outlawed+by+N.Y.+county/2100-7351_3-5934194.html

"According to a new proposal being considered by a suburb of New York City, any business or home office with an open wireless connection but no separate server to fend off Internet attacks would be violating the law.

Politicians in Westchester County are urging adoption of the law--which appears to be the first such legislation in the U.S.--because without it, "somebody parked in the street or sitting in a neighboring building could hack into the network and steal your most confidential data," County Executive Andy Spano said in a statement.

The draft proposal offered this week would compel all "commercial businesses" with an open wireless access point to have a "network gateway server" outfitted with a software or hardware firewall. Such a firewall, used to block intrusions from outside the local network, would be required even for a coffee shop that used an old-fashioned cash register instead of an Internet-linked credit card system that could be vulnerable to intrusions.

Scott Fernqvist, special assistant to the county's chief information officer, said Friday that he thought "the law would apply" to home offices as well.

"It was just introduced; it's a draft," Fernqvist said. "We're hoping it's enacted early next year, but this can change."

The proposed law has two prongs: First, "public Internet access" may not be provided without a network gateway server equipped with a firewall. Second, any business or home office that stores personal information also must install such a firewall-outfitted server even if its wireless connection is encrypted and not open to the public. All such businesses would be required to register with the county within 90 days.
How hacking has evolved
Music downloads without the software
Live video news online? Think flying dinosaurs
Hey, you got your iPod in my Xbox 360
Previous Next

The proposal echoes a slew of bills in Congress and in state legislatures that are being considered in the wake of recent security problems involving Bank of America, payroll provider PayMaxx and Reed Elsevier Group's LexisNexis service. But the other proposals tend to follow approaches such as requiring notification of breaches or restricting use of Social Security Numbers--as opposed to regulating wireless links.

According to the Westchester proposal, public Internet access sites also would have to post a sign saying: "You are accessing a network which has been secured with firewall protection. Since such protection does not guarantee the security of your personal information, use discretion." Violations of any part of the law would be punishable with fines of $250 or $500.

Representatives from the county's information technology department drove around downtown White Plains, N.Y., with laptop computers and detected 248 open wireless connections in less than half an hour, the county reported. Half lacked "visible security" features."


Some responses from slashdot

"

Now I go to Amazon.com and order a book over https; the packets are encrypted, nobody can get my credit card number, so what's the issue?

The issue is that your Corporate Overlords and their Political Henchmen want to keep an eye on you, and that is easier if all the data from and to your computer goes through a single wire. In a world full of public anonymous Wi-Fi access points, anyone could connect to anything from anywhere without giving away their own identity, allowing free exchange of information without fear of legal consequences, and making things impossible to censor (since it might be impossible to find the servers the data resides in, especially if the servers are running a P2P network like Freenet [freenetproject.org]); it is Big Brothers and Big Businesses worst nightmare.

Freedom is the worst enemy of Power, so of course powers-that-be try to crush it. This law is just another attempt of forces of darkness to crush all opposition and bring about a Digital Dark Age."

" This is entirely absurd. While there are people who don't know better, some chose to have their WiFi open.

And "some people" include such ignorant folks as Intel Corp., who operate a free-for-all access point on San Francisco's Union Square. Would the law outlaw this kind of marketing, too?

Oh, and a hint: Put your phone no. or eMail in your SSID and I will personally thank you when I use your AP."

"Make Unsecured OS Illegal too!!!" --I like this one the best -LOL

This is kind of off-topic, but it is hilarious. The easily offended should probably avoid.

http://home.uchicago.edu/~yli5/Flash/Fire.html
good song

Malaysia warned over pirated CDs --BBC

Malaysia's government has been accused of failing to act on evidence that licensed CD factories are producing pirated music, films and software.

Nigeria: Directors jostle to replace Copyright Commission boss --Daily Independent

A scramble for the position of Director General of Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) has begun following the indefinite suspension of the commission’s incumbent boss.

(Oh lordy, now watch me get an e-mail from this guy trying to "transer funds" to me so he can sneak them out of the country...)

File sharers courting copyright challenges --Fort Wayne Journal Gazette

Friendster and Grouper Partnership Fuels Personal Media File Sharing --PR Newswire

Friendster and Grouper Networks today announced a partnership that will allow Friendster users to share unlimited personal media files with each other using Grouper's personal sharing network.

Just Googling It Is Striking Fear Into Companies --NY Times

In Google, Wal-Mart sees both a technology pioneer and the seed of a threat, said Mr. Breyer, who is also a partner in a venture capital firm. The worry is that by making information available everywhere, Google might soon be able to tell Wal-Mart shoppers if better bargains are available nearby.

I object--George is off-topic AND off-color!!!! What did you google to find that?!

Well, yeah... George probably shoulda put that item in the "Off Topic Stuff" thread instead.

(But I enjoyed it! ...and YOU DID TOO #7)

We're going to have a talk about that, Shmoo....

"Hey Shmoo, can we ask the powers that be to dump the Sony ads? Really bad taste considering..." --TrueAudio

I thought so too (and in the past had complained about such ads from "opposed" entities...)

However, lol, I really LIKED Dreddsnik's deliciously "sinister" response:

""Hey Shmoo, can we ask the powers that be to dump the Sony ads? Really bad taste considering... "

Why, seriously ?
It's more money out of Sony's pocket.
I think the irony of sony paying to be
seen here is absolutely delicious ."

-----------------

But, seriously, I have no control of the banner ads at all. Those come from Dmusic (our HOST) and you need to address any and all complaints to furiousBall at Dmusic.

(He already has a TON from me, bless his poor soul.)

Aha---pile on furiousBall!!!!!

Dogpile!!!

Ah...I don't think so...it sounds nasty.

EVERYBODY knows that the town George is having fun with is pronounced FOO-as in FOO fighters, Kung- FOO, Egg FOO Young, even rymes with Shmoo-Foo.... Now we know for sure where George's mind lurks..

Men...

I know ShadowMom...

Men, can't live with 'em, pass the remote control.....

And I didn't know it was pronounced that way...there wasn't a pronunciation key included.

Then it's a good thing there's someone around here to keep all you guys straightened out..sheesh!

I have submitted this as front page news but will post it here anyhow to get my credit and get it out faster

ISPs Now Spying on Users

http://slyck.com/news.php?story=978

As governments all over the world step up the pressure for internet surveillance, we lift the lid on the shady world of ISP enforcment and uncover the international pressures that will be forcing them to work with police and mysterious other bodies.

The regulation of ISPs in the UK was originally a matter for a voluntary Code of Practice, established back in 2003 presumably as a mechanism to allow the Echelon eavesdropping project time to catch up with intensifying internet usage.

It included a requirement for ISPs to maintain comprehensive records of customer activities for 12 months, with the stark warning that if ISPs refused to comply, then the law would be changed and they would be forced to. Hardly voluntary, one might say. The rationale of the time was to help law enforcers stay ahead of the game when tracing pedophiles and their ilk.

That was back in 2003, and the EU now plans to compel all ISPs throughout Europe to keep records of internet activity for 12 months, with telephone records being retained for "at least" 6 months. Their rationale as we approach 2006? To actively pursue terrorist activity and aid “other law enforcement agencies”. Either pedophiles have ceased to exist or they felt it suited their political agenda to milk the threat of terrorism.

An unidentified UK ISP Blueyonder employee let slip to one of our readers that they routinely receive lists of IP addresses that are to be monitored for various “law enforcement” purposes, and that the resultant data was processed and provided to those requesting it. According to the information received, the Business Software Alliance and the BPI are amongst many requesting such information, although requests for any data identifying their clients go unanswered. Obviously if this is the case, it is likely to alter dramatically with the introduction of planned new legislation. They will simply have to comply.

Slyck decided to ask John Moorwood Senior Public Relations Manager of Telewest - who are the owners of the hugely popular Blueyonder ISP. John refused to enter any discussion on their use of spidering techniques of the kind reported to us, neither confirming nor denying our report, simply saying that “It is safe to assume that we do (so) as part of our overview of the network, to analyze trends and usage, but I'm not prepared to discuss and risk compromising our formal law enforcement policies"

This is of course a perfectly valid point, and so we asked him what exactly constituted a law enforcement agency. For example, did he agree that the BPI qualified as such, to which he responded " If it's a criminal issue, such as commercial piracy, then the police would initiate the formal request for identifying or personal data but we still require a court order"

We then asked if they had been called upon to collate or provide data regarding accesses by users to specific web sites or IP addresses? John explained “We may be asked by a third party, using a court order, to verify the identity of a user, based on the third party's information and evidence” , going on to add “That evidence may have been obtained by the third party using 'honeypots' or news group posting headers, etc. We ourselves do not specifically collate data on users' behavior, although we do inadvertently collect some information due to day-to-day running of operational systems such as web caches.”.

We went on to ask if they had collated data on the basis of specific internet activity (e.g. file transfers, ftp P2P, etc). John replied “We are constantly evaluating all forms of capacity planning systems, including some that could identify specific application traffic types, but we have never implemented such a system”

Accepting the need for capacity planning, we were curious why they are evaluating new systems giving their merger with NTL and talk of takeover bids? Surely this was time for rationalisation, and not expansion? Sensing that perhaps John was not giving us the full picture, we tried to press him on his peculiar choice of words such as “We ourselves do not specifically collate data on users' behavior”. He refused to be drawn, saying "I can't say either way, that's a matter of internal security policy and I'm neither agreeing nor denying”

When asked how his organization handled requests for further information (e.g. identification) regarding any specific user and how such information was used, John replied “Like any responsible ISP, we have our own abuse department to handle notifications of abusive behavior from our network. In the vast majority of cases these are found to originate as a consequence of 'zombied PCs', rather than any malicious intent by a user.

In the case of third party requests for identification, such as from the police and other government bodies, who have the power to require us to disclose this type of information under certain circumstances, we will comply with any legal obligations…. Occasionally we also receive requests to identify users from third parties who wish to pursue civil claims (e.g. in relation to copyright infringement). In these cases, it is also necessary for the party to obtain a court order requiring”.

We are obviously extremely grateful to John Moorwood of Telewest/Blueyonder for his help, as far as he felt able to go. Unfortunately this doesn’t shed much light on the changes that are being planned under new EU data retention legislation, neither did it tell us who these "other government bodies" were, although it suggests an underlying capability and willingness to comply with these requirements. Remember, ISP cooperation has only been a voluntary issue up until the present time, and this is set to change dramatically.

Quite clearly the ISPs know which side their bread is buttered, and in recognition of the fact that people generally want greater bandwidth for downloading purposes (60% of all internet traffic is for filesharing, according to Cachelogic and Big Champagne) they are perfectly happy for their customers to continue to use their services and watch their revenue grow. After all, unused bandwidth is absolutely no use to an ISP, it is simply dead money.

BT (generally known as British Telecom), the UK communications giant, were characteristically taciturn about all this when approached. Ian Read of their Press Office refusing to comment openly on what he described as “an enforcement debate” and in contrast with the extremely helpful staff at Blueyonder, emails and messages to BT's Jon Carter were left unanswered at the time of writing.

Other sources within BT have suggested that they are already well prepared for mandatory requirements of the sort being planned by the EU, explaining that they use similar if not identical technology to other ISPs and already consider themselves well placed to comply with requests such as those from “the police and other government bodies” to paraphrase Blueyonder’s John Moorwood.

When asked how that would be possible given current data protection legislation, our informant chillingly told us that such arrangements were already in place. He said that a “unique identifier” would be assigned to all those listed, and only the ISP itself would know exactly who that referred to. Any subpoena issued against them, forcing them to identify the individual concerned, would refer to the user only by that unique number until the court ordered that their identity was revealed.

The fact that this has been given such detailed thought must be of concern to all UK filesharers, for example, just who are these “other government bodies” that people keep referring to? If they do not themselves collate data on users' behavior, then who does? It seems quite likely that both this practice and this means of circumventing data protection laws are on the verge of widespread adoption, both in the UK and almost certainly everywhere before much longer.

With 60% of internet traffic being used for filesharing, it would be wise to anticipate proportionate enforcement effort. At no time since the birth of the Internet has our freedom been under a greater threat than it is today.

The writer acknowledges the invaluable cooperation of Telewest/Blueyonder and the assistance of Slyck member, Graphix, in contributing information for use in this article.

Also in the news today

Thieving Grokster Shuts Down

Well, that might as well have been the headline..look what they were made to claim on their site...

"Grokster's Web site was changed to display a message that its
file-sharing service was illegal and no longer available. ``There
are legal services for downloading music and movies,'' the message
said. ``This service is not one of them."

I wonder how many bucks they saved by placating the riaa in this fashion....

I apologize for my earlier post, which actually came from Fark. There was not an off-topic thread on the front page at the time. It was a lapse of judgement on my part. Probably because I was still laughing. You can't make stuff like this up.

There was a warning, though.

But I saw the Grokster story at the New York Times (front page). Here's their first paragraph:

"Grokster Ltd., a leading developer of Internet file-sharing software popular for stealing songs and movies online, agreed Monday to shut down operations to settle a landmark piracy case filed by Hollywood and the music industry, The Associated Press has learned."

It's good to see that AP has joined the RIAA propaganda team. Wonder how much that cost?

dammit, pepe beat me by a half an hour....

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/11/07/financial/f110145S42.DTL

I wonder when Google will offer a copyright or copyleft music search engine. I am thinking about their current service for copyright free books.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/07/podcast_license/

Dutch record companies say no to podcast licence

Dutch record companies have refused to contribute to a uniform podcasting licence proposed by the Dutch collection organisation for composers, lyricists and music publishers BUMA.

They are only interested if some form of DRM is in place, a spokesman for Dutch Association of Phonogram and Videogram Producers (NVPI) told Dutch news site 3voor12. So podcasters aren't allowed to use recorded music released by NVPI members. That agency represents most of the record companies in the Netherlands and abroad, including local offices of major record labels, such as EMI, Universal and Sony BMG.

This summer, BUMA introduced a provisional licence that would allow podcasters to use officially recorded music in their podcasts. Commercial podcasters would have to pay a minimum of €85 and amateurs €35 per month for an unlimited number of songs on an unlimited number of podcasts. BUMA is one of the first music collecting agencies in Europe to introduce such a licence.

However, BUMA's licence wouldn't cover the performing rights, only copyrights of composers, lyricists and music publishers. BUMA was hoping the record industry would join them for a uniform licence, but the record companies are afraid that they have limited control over the podcasts. Nor are they keen to grant a license for "unlimited use".

Spokesman Wouter Rutten says there is little logic to the proposed license. "We simply don't understand why everyone has to pay the same amount," he said.

This may? make some here happy!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051107/ap_on_hi_te/downloading_music;_ylt=Avah4bveKEouwilvuEHy9MWs0NUE

But wait, theres more...

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-110705grokster_lat,0,4450717.story?coll=la-home-headlines

FIRST 4 INTERNET **LIES** ABOUT THEIR DRM ON SONY CD'S
http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/2005/11/sony s-rootkit-first-4-internet.html
btw read the posts that people have posted in response to this on his website =)

"Sony’s Rootkit: First 4 Internet Responds
First 4 Internet, the company that implements Sony’s Digital Rights Management (DRM) software that includes a rootkit, has responded to my last post, More on Sony: Dangerous Decloaking Patch, EULAs and Phoning Home. They rebut four of the points I raise in the post. Their first statement relates to my assertion that Sony’s player contacts Sony’s web site each time it runs and sends the site an ID associated with the CD the user is playing:

The player has a standard rotating banner that connects the user to additional content (e.g. provides a link to the artist web site). The player simply looks online to see if another banner is available for rotation. The communication is one-way in that a banner is simply retrieved from the server if available. No information is ever fed back or collected about the consumer or their activities.

I speculated that the player sends Sony’s web site a CD identifier as part of a check to see if new song lyrics or artwork was available, which they essentially confirm. Their claim that the communication is “one way” from Sony’s web site is false, however, since Sony can make a record of each time their player is used to play a CD, which CD is played, and what computer is playing the CD. If they’ve configured standard Web server logging then they are doing that. As I stated earlier, I doubt Sony is using this information to track user behavior, but the information allows them to do so. In any case, First 4 Internet cannot claim what Sony is or is not doing with the information since they do not control those servers, and the First 4 Internet response fails to address the fact that the End User License Agreement (EULA) and Sony executives either make no mention of the “phone home” behavior or explicitly deny it.

Another point that I made in the post is that the decloaking patch that Sony has made available weighs in at a relatively large 3.5 MB because it not only removes the rootkit, it also replaces most of the DRM files with updated versions. First 4 Internet responded with this:

In addition to removing the cloaking, Service Pack 2 includes all fixes from the earlier Service Pack 1 update. In order to ensure a secure installation, Service Pack 2 includes the newest version of all DRM components, hence the large file size for the patch. We have updated the language on our web site to be clearer on this point.

It’s not clear to me what they mean by “a secure installation”, but like most of the disclosure in this story, they’ve acknowledged the updating nature of the patch only after someone else has disclosed it first. What’s also lost in their response is that Sony DRM users not following this story as it develops have no way of knowing that there’s a patch available or that they even have software installed that requires a patch.

Further, Sony’s patch is dangerous because the way that it removes the cloak could crash Windows. I discussed the flaw in the patch’s decloaking method in the first post and again in the last one (I also provide a simple way for users to remove the cloak safely), yet First 4 Internet refuses to recognize it. They contest my claim in their comment:

This is pure conjecture. F4I is using standard Windows commands (net stop) to stop their driver. Nothing more.

While the probability of a crash is relatively small, its not “pure conjecture”, but fundamental to multithreaded programming concepts. Anyone that writes Windows device driver code must have a firm grasp of these concepts or they can easily introduce bugs and security holes into Windows. Here’s one of many scenarios that will lead to a crash when the patch decloaks Sony’s rootkit:

1. Thread A invokes one of the functions that Aries.sys, the Sony rootkit driver developed by First 4 Internet, has redirected
2. Thread A reads the address of the redirected function from the system service table, which points at the rootkit function in Aries.sys
3. Thread A executes the first few instructions of the Aries.sys function, which is enough to enter the driver, but not enough to execute the Aries.sys code that attempts to track threads running within it
4. Thread A is context swapped off the CPU by the Windows scheduler
5. The scheduler gives thread B the CPU, which executes the patch’s “unload driver” command, unloading the Aries.sys driver from memory
6. The scheduler runs thread A again, which executes memory that previously held the contents of Aries.sys, but is now invalid or holds other code or data
7. Windows detects thread A’s illegal execution and crashes the system with a blue screen

First 4 Internet’s failure to imagine this control flow is consistent with their general failure to understand Windows device driver programming.

As further evidence of this, I’ve performed further testing of the Aries.sys driver using a program I wrote, NTCrash2, and found that Aries.sys fails to perform basic checks on the data passed to it by applications. NTCrash2 passes randomly-generated invalid data to Windows APIs and on a stock Windows system simply receives error codes from the APIs. However, when NTCrash2 runs on a system that has the Sony rootkit installed Windows crashes. Here’s an example Windows blue screen that identifies Aries.sys as the cause of a crash that occurred while NTCrash2 ran:



Besides demonstrating the ineptitude of the First 4 Internet programmers, this flaw highlights my message that rootkits create reliability risks in addition to security risks. Because the software package that installed the rootkit is hidden when Windows is running (in this case Sony’s DRM software), and even if exposed not clearly identified, if an application triggers one of Aries.sys’s bugs a user would have no way of associating the driver responsible for the resulting crash with any software package they have installed on their system. The user would therefore be unable to conclusively diagnose the cause of the crash, check to see if they have the most recent version of the driver or of uninstalling the driver.

First 4 Internet and Sony also continue to argue that the rootkit poses no security vulnerability, repeating it in the description of the patch download. Any software that hides files, processes, and registry keys based on a prefix of letters can clearly be used by malicious software.

First 4 Internet’s final rebuttal relates to my complaint that as part of a request to uninstall their DRM software Sony requires you to submit your email address to their marketing lists. First 4 Internet says:

An email address is required in order to send the consumer the uninstall utility. The wording on the web site is the standard Sony BMG corporate privacy policy that is put on all Sony web sites. Sony BMG does nothing with the customer service data (email addresses) other than use them to respond to the consumer.

The Sony privacy policy the comment refers to clearly states that Sony may add a user’s email address to their marketing lists:

Except on sites devoted to particular recording artists, we may share the information we collect from you with our affiliates or send you e-mail promotions and special offers from reputable third parties in whose products and services we think you may have an interest. We may also share your information with reputable third-parties who may contact you directly.

Again, the fact is that most users of Sony’s DRM won’t realize that they even have software that can be uninstalled. Also, the comment does not explain why Sony won’t simply make the uninstaller available as a freely accessible download like they do the patch, nor why users have to submit two requests for the uninstaller and then wait for further instructions to be emailed (I still have not received the uninstaller). The only motivation I can see for this is that Sony hopes you’ll give up somewhere in the process and leave their DRM software on your system. I’ve seen similar strategies used by adware programs that make it difficult, but not impossible, for you to remove them.

Instead of admitting fault for installing a rootkit and installing it without proper disclosure, both Sony and First 4 Internet claim innocence. By not coming clean they are making clear to any potential customers that they are a not only technically incompetent, but also dishonest."

posted by Mark Russinovich @ 7:29 PM

The LA Times story about Grokster (linked above, I believe) has a front page lead, "Developer of file-sharing software used to steal songs online will shut down to settle piracy case."

Yeah, I was sorry to hear Madonna had to cancel this year's tour. Someone stole her songs.

"This settlement brings to a close an incredibly significant chapter in the story of digital music," said RIAA Chairman Mitch Bainwol in a statement."

So with the demise of Grokster, the riaa talks as if this is it folks, it's all over and we win! No more file sharing...and I thought they was dumb before.

Sony in trouble accross the sea, caught in the laws made for pirates, couldn't happen to a nicer bounce of folks.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123454,00.asp

http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/2005/11/sonys-rootkit-first-4-internet.html

"I am willing to BET that Sony will never release a FULL un-installer for the PUBLIC here is why.

Sony is using these CD's as a LEGAL DRM Shield test, more below:

Just Wondered if others thought these same thoughts?

I am sure as some have already stated, that this Sony Mess, is not considered a "Big Deal" but are we forgetting the possible Fallout from this?

It could go 2 ways:

No Legal Action Or Change Of Laws Because Of This

1. Others can and will use similar techniques and claim they were protecting their software and not just for Media related software, but for everything!

2. Many folks in these forums, who already are kind enough to volunteer their time to help others will be swamped with very complicated removal instructions.

3. When more than one of these type protection mechanisms is installed on a system, it will be a house of cards to determine, which one to un-install first. There will be NO right way, it will be based on the order the malware was installed, as well as how many of these you are infected with.

4. More systems than ever before will become infected with malware because the mechanism used is now provided by companies providing commercial software which have much more access to the general public and in many different forms than the current malware producers, including hackers.

5. Most people might not even be able to pre-scan the software prior to being installed because it may be compressed or encrypted in such a way that you cannot see what it will look like until fully installed. This would mean you would need to take the chance to install it, and check later.

6. Exploits of holes in these protection methods will allow non-seasoned hackers to take advantage of such said holes with no liability as well. Since in some cases what they did might not have been possible without the commercial companies software.

7. As stated on Mark's Blog, if Sony's software stands as is, as legitimate DRM. Then any company that makes software that fixes the problems caused by this Root Kit exploit could be in violation of DRM laws and face serious consequences. For example, Microsoft could not legally create a patch that prevents this type of behavior as a security update.

If ANY software author creates software which contains media files, they could claim the cloaking portion was to protect their Media files under DRM, which would make it illegal to remove their cloaking as well.

This would include currently known spyware as well. Which for all practical purposes would now restrict automated removal, which is now allowed, simply by using DRM as a shield by including Media files of any type during their installation process.

Legal Action Or Change Of Laws Because Of This

1. Finally, some sanity comes to the rights of ownership of computer systems, and the ability of International Companies to Join the malware industry will be at least hindered, if not stopped.

2. Companies that could supply automated methods attempting to remove this type of software from systems will not need to fear litigation because the creators of the software use DRM as their shield.

Very Dangerous Precedent Exists NOW!

It matters very little if this was oversight, malice or accidental. Equally, it matters just as little that a ActiveX method of removal is offered because it does NOT determine that this method of DRM is wrong.

Therefore it is tying the hands of any entity which would attempt to offer any automated process to remove this or any future derivative of these types of methodologies because it has been used as an excepted method for DRM.

The proof itself that Sony was NOT compelled to remove this method of DRM as a mandate, would itself prove this.

We are setting a very dangerous precedent for other companies, and/or individuals who create software.

This actually could be the most important precedent set since the personal computer was created if we are going to allow ANY entity to continue to do this in the future.

We will have almost removed the purpose of EULA and in fact created the "Act Of Downloading" ANYTHING removes the liability of the creator(s) of the software downloaded itself.

I hope people don't think I am going over-board here, because I think after all is said and done, there are many companies that are waiting in the wings to see how this is resolved, and that this moment based on how it all goes down, could be the turning-point of what rights the computer owner has, once they have accepted ANY download.

There are many more possible BAD things that could come out of this, I just tried to think of some major ones.

Sony, will NEVER release a PUBLIC un-installer that removes ALL of this, without legal action requiring them to do so.

This is a Cheap DRM shield test testing their legal rights, and I would also BET they WILL threaten ANY company that attempts to create an automated method to remove this from systems using DRM as their shield , watch..

They have already INFORMED virus scanning compaines on how to not FLAG this as a false-positive get it?

See where they are going, they will SUE anyone who tries to remove it on a mass scale!"

Let me guess: People with Macintosh or Linux operating systems don't have anything to be concerned about.
Those using Windows OS need to carefully scrutinize any potential installation of executable code from now on. When in doubt, holding down the shift key can prevent unwanted programs from taking hold after agreeing to any EULA, but it may also prevent installing what you want as well.
Face it, using Windows has become hazardous to your peace of mind.

Trueaudio

It's an issue of power. In your worst case scenerio security schemes for computers are essentially outlawed. This would not be in the best interests of the vast majority of buisnesses, many of which are much more powerful than the music companys.

Great article, peatrap!
"XCP installs itself without adequately notifying users of what it will do to their computers, it is too difficult to uninstall, and it also appears to be in secret communication with Sony servers, Curry said.

Even a software patch released by Sony last week to decloak the hidden digital rights management software counts as spyware, Curry added. "Unfortunately the patch also fails our scorecard," he said. "It fails to notify you about what it's doing, and it can cause the system to crash."

Though XCP uses sophisticated tricks to hide itself from system tools, it can actually be circumvented by disabling the Windows Autorun feature, which launches XCP as soon as the CD is placed into a drive, Curry said.

Autorun can be turned off using Windows system tools, but Curry also suggested a much simpler technique to temporarily disable the feature: Holding down the left shift key when installing an XCP-protected CD."

Holding down the shift key... Is that circumvention, mroop?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/08/sony_end_ps_region-coding/
Sony to end PlayStation game region-coding?

Sony PlayStation 3 games may ship without codes that fix releases to specific geographical territories.

According to Sony Computer Entertainment Australia chief Michael Ephraim, the company sees the emergence of a global HDTV standard as the basis for dropping region-coding, in an interview with Australian IT.

"If you look at the fact that [the PS3] will support high-definition TV, which will be a global standard, there's a good likelihood that it will be global region, as for example we've done with the PSP," he said.

PlayStation and PS2 games are currently fixed to specific regions, much like DVDs are. A game bought in, say, the US will not play in a machine purchased in Europe, a least not without controversial and potentially illegal modification work on the console. The legality of the action depends in which country the change is made.

vietnam arline joins boycott
http://p2pnet.net/story/6908

This has gotten so crazy, pretty soon we won't hear music anywhere, because no one will know what money they owe, to whom they owe the money to, and for which songs they owe the money on...come on music companies and the powers that be, could you make it any more complicated for everyone..I dare ya!

It's kinda funny how people aren't willing to spend money for music these days...

From the SF Chronicle

In 1969, at the height of the Grateful Dead's rise from the San Francisco ballroom scene, the band recorded a live album over four nights at the Fillmore West, "Live/Dead," that's considered not only one of the band's best, but one of the best live albums ever made.

Last week the Dead released a 10-CD boxed set containing every single note the band played during that four-night run, and the set became an instant collector's item. Not only did its entire limited edition of 10,000 copies sell out, but, within days of its release, copies were going for more than $700 on eBay, almost 10 times the original $80 retail price.

Sony to end PlayStation game region-coding?

Don't buy it! It probably contain a rootkit and it's going to fuck up your monitor!

"What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of free music sources? (LimeWire, etc.)"

You don't feed the parasites! You help protect our society.

The FBI's Secret Scrutiny
In Hunt for Terrorists, Bureau Examines Records of Ordinary Americans

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501366_pf.html

I don't necessarily want somebody knowing what videos I rent or the fact that I like cartoons," said Mason, the Washington field office chief. But if those records "are never used against a person, if they're never used to put him in jail, or deprive him of a vote, et cetera, then what is the argument?"
*************************
then FBI shouldn't care if I own a few cases of machine guns, atomic bomb or two, I don'y plan on using them, then whats the argument.

The RIAA Doesn't Speak For Me
Preach On Larry Rhodes

Story: Last waltz for Grokster
A representative of the RIAA stated that the settlement with Grokster closes a chapter in the history of the recording industry on a high note not only for the recording industry, but for music fans and consumers everywhere. However, the RIAA, and certainly that representative, do not speak for me.

I am a music fan, and I'm a consumer. I even buy CD's and DVD's, because, well, I like having all the packaging and the better quality of sound and video that come with legit products.

However, I do not believe this has ended on any note that I would consider high. The RIAA has been bullying companies and consumers everywhere with the threats of lawsuits, and in thousands of instances, actual lawsuits, often terrifying unwitting defendants into settling their cases by agreeing to pay thousands of dollars for a few dollars' worth of music.

The RIAA represents companies that have, over the past several years, continuously peddled recordings of what I wouldn't even call music. I certainly wouldn't pay money for it, and I haven't. If I don't like it, I sure as heck won't buy it. And, if I did, I wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for it. I am inclined to believe the tactics of the RIAA have been geared more toward trying to make the recording labels SOME money, however little, from products that few if any consumers would actually buy. What's worse is that the artists who were allegedly ripped off by file-sharing aren't getting any of the ill-gotten profits, yet they were the ones who actually created the music the RIAA is coercing people into paying for.

So, when the RIAA says this has ended on a high note for me, they are not speaking for me, and they are committing nothing more than defamation of my character in claiming that I, as a consumer and music fan, agree with and condone their behavior. I am disgusted with them now more than ever, and I hope my bringing this to light will, in whatever way possible, chip away at their credibility, because I believe they aren't credible in the least.

A-men Brother!

NBC Universal crying about something or another!

NBC Universal Releases Piracy Study

NEW YORK, November 8: NBC Universal has released a study on the impact of the theft of intellectual property rights on the U.S. economy in a move to demonstrate that digital piracy is not just a concern for the music, television and music industries.

In releasing the report, NBC Universal Chairman and CEO Bob Wright explained, “Digital piracy is an issue that goes far beyond illegal downloading of music or movies. Theft and counterfeiting of intellectual property of all types is a serious and growing problem for the U.S. economy. This study provides important empirical evidence of just how much is at stake.”

Researched and written by Stephen E. Siwek of Economists Incorporated, Engines of Growth: The Economic Contributions of the U.S. Intellectual Property Industries analyzes the industries that rely most heavily on copyright or patent protection to generate revenue, employ and compensate workers, and contribute to economic growth.

The research found that U.S. intellectual property industries are the most important growth drivers in the current U.S. economy, contributing nearly 40 percent of the growth achieved by all U.S. private industry and nearly 60 percent of the growth of U.S. exportable high-value-add products and services. These industries are also central to the growth of the economy—without them, gross domestic product (GDP) 10-year growth estimates would be approximately 30 percent lower than current predictions. Businesses dependent on intellectual property rights are responsible for 20 percent of the total U.S. private industry’s contribution to GDP and 40 percent of the contribution of U.S. exportable high-value-add products and services to GDP. They also represent about 18 million employees who earn an average of 40 percent more than all U.S. workers. Further, in 2003 the “core” copyright industries contributed $33 billion in reported net export revenues, and the patent-dependent aerospace industry reported 2004 net export revenues of $32 billion—these two sectors are the largest positive contributors to U.S. balance of trade.

NBC Universal EVP and General Counsel Rick Cotton noted in unveiling the study, “Growth in today’s knowledge-based global economy is driven by innovation, invention and creativity. Intellectual property protection is the bedrock on which this economic growth rests. This study makes clear that intellectual property is the lifeblood of both growth and high-wage employment in the United States. To the extent that the IP-intensive sectors of the U.S. economy are jeopardized by theft and counterfeiting, so too is the future ability of U.S. workers to compete in an increasingly global marketplace.”

"http://news.com.com/5208-7355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=11069&messageID=82524&start=-1
>>"I think this is slightly old news,"Gilliat-
Smith said. "For the eight months that these CDs have been out, we haven't had any comments about malware (malicious software) at all."

Let me translate this.

"Since most people lack the skills of
Russinovich, no one else so far has been able to track any of the system failures that we have induced back to us. You see, we spent an extraordinary amount of time covering our tracks by cloaking things that people would normally able to see in their systems.

"As to the (probably thousands of) poor smucks whose CD disappeared due to our code, or who blue screened, or whatever, and who spend hours trying to figure out what was wrong, and then more hours rebuilding their systems - well - who cares. They didn't trace it back to us - it doesn't affect our bottom line."

I really love his attitude: "well, we knew that we screwed you eight months ago - boy are you guys dummies that you only now have figured it out."

Hopefully, a good case will be made against these clowns, and Sony will pay heavily though a class action suit, and in the marketplace. With a little luck, maybe someone will even do some jail time.

Here's what Sony BMG's Global Digital Business President Thomas Hesse told NPR (National Public Radio) when he was asked for his stance on the matter:
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"

"Most people,i think don't even know what PIRACY is, so why should they care about it?"

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12651

As always, thanks to TrueAudio for great posts.

And, BTW, hats off to Gad for supplying some more good stuff.

Regarding what Sony/BMG's President had said . . .
My response to him is: Hey, Tom Hesse, ol' boy, I got news for ya; what people don't know can hurt them.

And it could conceivably even apply to arrogant multinational media corporations like you; i.e., screwing around with your consumer base can come back to bite you financially in the butt!

List of known corrupt CD's :

http://ukcdr.org/issues/cd/bad/

Maybe the reason it took 8 months is because it took that long to find a buyer for one of those cd's.

Ok, things are really getting ridiculous now....

Oakley Releases THUMP 2 - New Version of Digital Music Eyewear

I wear underwear as well, but I wouldn't want it/them to start singing to me...

Okay, Pepe...sigh...you force me to say it...I would.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2005/11/08/former_riaa_chief_berman_joins_wurld_media/

Former RIAA chief joins board of P2P file sharing company

Saratoga Springs (New York) - In the clearest indication yet that the recording industry may be prepared to drop its objections to peer-to-peer networking as a technology, Jason Berman - who for nearly 13 years headed the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) - has joined the board of directors of Wurld Media, the company behind Peer Impact, the most prominent distributor of licensed multimedia content over P2P.

In a statement released yesterday by Wurld Media, Berman said, "Digital distribution has forever changed the way that consumers discover and purchase their music and other entertainment content. Peer Impact has been at the forefront of providing users with a legal way to share that content. I am very pleased to be joining a team who is committed to creating the future." Berman currently serves as Chairman Emeritus of IFPI, a consortium of recording companies worldwide that support anti-piracy causes.


Wurld Media made news last July, just prior to the launch of Peer Impact, when its CEO, Greg Kerber, testified before the Senate Commerce Committee as the sole representative of the pro-licensing side of the P2P industry. There, Kerber addressed senators' concerns over the nature of P2P, defending the technology while promoting the use of business models to entice music publishers, and to grow a new industry. Peer Impact has since quickly garnered the support of the four major publishers, and a great many independent publishers and labels.

In his company's statement yesterday, Kerber said that Berman "served on the front lines during the birth of the file-sharing revolution, and we are fortunate to gain his insight as we continue to build the file-sharing model of the future."

Wurld Media's announcement comes one day after a decision by Grokster - the company whose historic defeat in the US Supreme Court sparked July's Senate hearings - to shut down its file sharing service.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/08/korean_p2per_down/

South Korean P2P service powers down

South Korea's largest online music service, Soribada, yesterday shut down its P2P file-sharing operation, seven days after it was ordered to do so by the Seoul Central District Court.

Soribada had some 22m users, South Korean paper the Chosun Ilbo reports.

The court order was the result of legal action brought against Soribada by the Korean Association of Phonogram Producers (KAPP), South Korea's answer to the Recording Industry Ass. of America (RIAA). In addition to the suspension, the court fined Soribada KRW10m ($9,550) a day for so long as the P2P service remained operational.

The KAPP this week said it may institute fresh legal action against Soribada in a bid to reclaim money it alleges its members lost to illegal file-sharing enabled by the service.

In September, Korean P2P company Bugs Music agreed to charge users a subscription fee and license content from local music labels. The KAPP said it is currently talking to other Korean P2P business about paying royalties for songs traded on their networks. If they fail to agree, they face legal action, the organisation warned.

I think perhaps this is frontpage material?

Napster - the inside story and lessons for entrepreneurs


Shawn Fanning created Napster in his dorm room at Northeastern. It was the fastest-growing application in the history of the Internet. We changed the world but failed to achieve business success. Here is a glimpse into the inside story of Napster, and at the end, some lessons learned for entrepreneurs.
---

Follow link for full article.

Suncomm falls for p2pnet's DRM spoof article.

http://p2pnet.net/story/6914


LOL!

Haven't scrolled though to see if this has already been posted, but....

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2005/11/calif_ny_lawsui.html

Let the suits against Sony roll!!!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/09/sony_drm_who_cares/

Sony digital boss - rootkit ignorance is bliss

The President of Sony BMG's global digital business division Thomas Hesse has weighed into the storm over the 'rootkit'-style copy restriction software introduced on some recent audio CDs.

Sony's software installs itself by stealth, conceals itself, then intercepts low level Windows systems calls. Removing it causes the CD drive to be rendered inoperable. The only cure is to reformat the disk and reinstall Windows.

What responsibility did Hesse feel for the havoc his CDs had caused?

"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?" he huffed.

I think we can take that as: "No responsibility at all."

(Hesse made his comments on NPR radio on Friday - you can hear them here, 1m:50s into the short report.)

But IT departments beg to differ.

A support manager at an IT department in a medium sized corporation told us that a CD-borne infection of Sony DRM is already causing his team headaches.

A major antivirus vendor diagnosed the problem as a nasty case of DRM, he told us, but the problem didn't end there. The Sony 'root kit' causes the antivirus software to go haywire, popping up alerts at the rate of one a second.

Three systems have so far been flattened, he said. The original culprit was a Van Zant CD - from Sony BMG.

And it gets worse.

On Sunday Mark Russinovich of Sysinternals.com, whose forensics last week identified the DRM as a 'rootkit' style infection, has been taking a look at the patch subsequently issued by First4Internet, the British company which wrote the crippleware.

All the patch does is force XP to issue Windows commands (eg, "net stop") that disable the driver. Because XP is a multithreaded OS, this is a brute force procedure that can cause the system to crash if resources are in contention.

Russinovich also notes that the Sony DRM software still contains vulnerabilities that expose a system to a potential blue screen of death. Instead of exiting gracefully and returning standard Windows system errors, the DRM exits disgracefully.

Which, we suggest, is exactly what Sony's Herr Hesse should be considering right now.

Have you had problems with Sony in your IT support department? Write and let us know.

LOL I broke the webpage

I'll fix go fix it. A new edition is now up!